P
pdoff
Guest
CALIFORNIA, I am the owner of a tropical fish store, and have lost a case in small claims court. A customer wanted a refund for the set-up, and I was ordered to repay the amount ($760.00 plus court fees). The statement on the judge’s decision explicitly states “The plantiff will return the fish tank after judgment has been satisfied.” This means I must pay the full amount before I receive the merchandise back. Well, we were about to settle this at the same time, however, when the customer returned with the set-up, half of the materials originally bought and included in the full purchase price was missing.
These “missing” materials are actually some of the living and consumable portions of the set-up, and make up a significant amount of the price (about $300 worth). This customer has been extremely difficult at any negotiations, and demands a full refund, despite the obvious fact that irreplaceable parts are missing. I would easily pay the amount I was ordered to pay and have the customer fined in contempt for not fulfilling their end of the bargain or sue them for the missing parts, but my situation gets worse.
After speaking to the Legal Advice department of the Small Claims court, they pointed out the ambiguity in the statement from the judge, and said that technically, they only have to return the fish tank, and nothing else. This was very discouraging to know, and the fact that such a vague statement can be taken so literally is absolutely absurd. The whole premise of the case was conducted with the understanding that a fish tank system was bought, and that the system would be returned. But the simplicity of the wording of the judgment was a mistake made by the judge, and now I am held liable for it?!
The people in Legal Advice claim that I could have asserted to make the judgment more specific and ask to have these things stated, but how was I to know that I was supposed to catch such a ridiculous formality or else it would be held against me? The only alternative they suggested was for me to file an appeal and have the wording of the judgment amended to include “all things” and a copy of the receipt to specify the materials in question.
It would cost an additional fee of $85.00 for me to file an appeal, as well as the headaches and waste of time that follows. Also, I have very good reason to believe that the customer will not be able to return the “missing material” as they are living things that must have died and/or been discarded. So even if I were to amend the wording of the judgment, I would still have to sue again for the missing things.
A more desirable alternative would be to ask the judge to reduce the amount owed to reflect the irreplaceable parts on the customer’s behalf, but the customer is adamant on receiving a full refund, and will most likely disagree to such a request.
Rather than begin the headache of the appeals process, I attempted one last time to renegotiate with the customer, and failed. They referred me to their lawyer, who said if we pay his client, they will return the merchandise. I stated that I wanted to protect my interests as well, and wanted to make sure I receive everything that was sold. The lawyer agreed, and said that if they don’t return everything as ordered, then they can be held in contempt. But obviously I have learned otherwise that I am cursed with the technicality of the vague judgment. He then threatened to counter sue for mental anguish or something of that nature if I file an appeal.
The customer wants a full refund. I want what’s fair, which is a full return of merchandise. The customer does not have all the merchandise, yet is very irrational and insists on a full refund. I am stuck with a very vague and ambiguous statement for a judgment, and have been informed (by the people in the Legal Advice department of the Samll Claims Court whose competency and knowledge of the law is questionable) that if I pay and all I receive in return is a fish tank, then the judgment is technically fulfilled and I have lost my chance at an appeal, and an attempt to sue would be futile. Yet if I do appeal, it will cost more money, more headache, and the possible threat of being counter sued (though their credibility is seriously questioned).
What should I do? Is the judge in any way liable for the vague wording of the judgment? Do I have to go through the whole appeals process just to have the wording of the judgment amended to include all items purchased, or atleast state something more realistic and fair? Can the vague wording of the judgment be taken so literally, so that all that has to be returned is simply a fish tank, and nothing else even though the amount in dispute reflects the purchase of a number of items? And is the threat of counter-suing for mental anguish realistic?
These “missing” materials are actually some of the living and consumable portions of the set-up, and make up a significant amount of the price (about $300 worth). This customer has been extremely difficult at any negotiations, and demands a full refund, despite the obvious fact that irreplaceable parts are missing. I would easily pay the amount I was ordered to pay and have the customer fined in contempt for not fulfilling their end of the bargain or sue them for the missing parts, but my situation gets worse.
After speaking to the Legal Advice department of the Small Claims court, they pointed out the ambiguity in the statement from the judge, and said that technically, they only have to return the fish tank, and nothing else. This was very discouraging to know, and the fact that such a vague statement can be taken so literally is absolutely absurd. The whole premise of the case was conducted with the understanding that a fish tank system was bought, and that the system would be returned. But the simplicity of the wording of the judgment was a mistake made by the judge, and now I am held liable for it?!
The people in Legal Advice claim that I could have asserted to make the judgment more specific and ask to have these things stated, but how was I to know that I was supposed to catch such a ridiculous formality or else it would be held against me? The only alternative they suggested was for me to file an appeal and have the wording of the judgment amended to include “all things” and a copy of the receipt to specify the materials in question.
It would cost an additional fee of $85.00 for me to file an appeal, as well as the headaches and waste of time that follows. Also, I have very good reason to believe that the customer will not be able to return the “missing material” as they are living things that must have died and/or been discarded. So even if I were to amend the wording of the judgment, I would still have to sue again for the missing things.
A more desirable alternative would be to ask the judge to reduce the amount owed to reflect the irreplaceable parts on the customer’s behalf, but the customer is adamant on receiving a full refund, and will most likely disagree to such a request.
Rather than begin the headache of the appeals process, I attempted one last time to renegotiate with the customer, and failed. They referred me to their lawyer, who said if we pay his client, they will return the merchandise. I stated that I wanted to protect my interests as well, and wanted to make sure I receive everything that was sold. The lawyer agreed, and said that if they don’t return everything as ordered, then they can be held in contempt. But obviously I have learned otherwise that I am cursed with the technicality of the vague judgment. He then threatened to counter sue for mental anguish or something of that nature if I file an appeal.
The customer wants a full refund. I want what’s fair, which is a full return of merchandise. The customer does not have all the merchandise, yet is very irrational and insists on a full refund. I am stuck with a very vague and ambiguous statement for a judgment, and have been informed (by the people in the Legal Advice department of the Samll Claims Court whose competency and knowledge of the law is questionable) that if I pay and all I receive in return is a fish tank, then the judgment is technically fulfilled and I have lost my chance at an appeal, and an attempt to sue would be futile. Yet if I do appeal, it will cost more money, more headache, and the possible threat of being counter sued (though their credibility is seriously questioned).
What should I do? Is the judge in any way liable for the vague wording of the judgment? Do I have to go through the whole appeals process just to have the wording of the judgment amended to include all items purchased, or atleast state something more realistic and fair? Can the vague wording of the judgment be taken so literally, so that all that has to be returned is simply a fish tank, and nothing else even though the amount in dispute reflects the purchase of a number of items? And is the threat of counter-suing for mental anguish realistic?